Britain’s Conviction Politician

Even her adversaries knew that Margaret Thatcher meant what she said

by PETER WHITTLE

Within hours of Margaret Thatcher’s death, some concerned voices on the Left expressed hope that their comrades would have the self-possession to remain reasonably dignified in reacting to the news, bearing in mind that this was not just the passing of an obviously towering political figure, but also of a frail 87-year-old lady. You’d think such an appeal to decency would be unnecessary, but that is to be unfamiliar with the more unhinged elements of the British Left, which, in the former prime minister’s declining years, have boasted of the parties they would throw when the day finally came. As I write, the ugliness is already evident: the hard-left Member of Parliament George Galloway has taken to Twitter with the message “Tramp the dirt down,” and the Durham Miners Association has declared Thatcher’s death “a great day” for coal miners. Not far from where I sit, the long-running stage musical of the film Billy Elliott—set during the 1984 miners’ strike—features a song celebrating the future death of the hated lady. I wonder what will happen when it gets performed tonight. Will it be left out of the show from a sense of decorum, if nothing else? Or will it be sung with even greater gusto? Perhaps the latter, given the cultural and artistic establishment’s abiding hatred for a woman whose greatness often seemed better appreciated outside Britain.

That Margaret Thatcher inspired loathing as well as adoration—that she was what the media habitually call “a divisive figure”—is beyond doubt. But the nature of that loathing is revealing. Its intensity derives not just from opposition to her policies, or even to the fact that she trounced her opponents in three straight elections. It stems from bitterness among the formerly entrenched Left about something more fundamental: a realization that it has lost the argument.

Some of the criticisms of Thatcher by the great and good of the cultural elite went beyond pure political antipathy. They were marked by naked, unashamed snobbery and sexism. They hated her not just for what she believed, but also for what she was, a grammar-school-educated meritocrat from lower-middle-class origins. This is partly a characteristic of British society. Whereas few, if any, Americans knew what Ronald Reagan’s father did for a living, everybody in Britain knew Thatcher was a grocer’s daughter.

The Real Cyprus Template

The One You're Not Supposed To Notice

by Charles Hugh-Smith

The Real Cyprus Template reveals the core-periphery Neocolonial-Financialization Model in all its predatory glory.

Much has been said about "the Cyprus Template" (the so-called bail-in, where deposits are expropriated to recapitalize the insolvent banks), but virtually nothing has been written about the Real Cyprus Template.

Longtime correspondent David P. (proprietor of Market Daily Briefing) charted some very interesting data that enables us to follow the money--specifically, Eurozone money in the "foreign deposit sources" (deposits in Cyprus banks that originated from outside Cyprus).

It appears the key preliminary step of the Real Cyprus Template is that money-center banks in Germany and other "core" Eurozone nations pull their money out of the soon-to-implode "periphery" nation's banks before the banking crisis is announced.

As David observed, "I think this explains a lot about something that has always puzzled me: why the delay in resolving Cyprus after the Greek haircut?"

Here is David's explanation and two key charts:

---

"The Cyprus situation had been simmering for at least a year when in March of 2013 it finally broke; Cyprus had a week to take care of its banking situation or else face a cutoff of access to the eurosystem by the ECB. This brought matters to a head; the Cyprus Bail-In was finally settled upon, where uninsured depositors in the two largest banks in Cyprus took major haircuts, and must wait for return of their money until the assets of the banks are run down.

The banking problems in Cyprus had their roots in the Greek Sovereign Default, and were known by the general public for about a year prior to the recent default; a New York Times article dated April 11, 2012 lays out the particulars.

Looking at Cyprus bank security assets in data provided by the ECB, the problems were visible earlier - right after the first Greek haircut in mid 2011, and a second haircut finalized in early 2012. This was a 11 billion euro hole in a system with 100 billion in assets total, centered upon two banks that held half the deposits in the system.

Greek Crisis Timeline

Date	Event
April 2010	Greek Sovereign Bonds Declared Junk
May 2010	110 Euro bailout, no haircut
July 2011	"Private Sector Involvement" decided at EU Summit
Oct 2011	130 Euro bailout, 53% face value haircut
Mar 2012	Haircuts take effect; actual haircut 85%

You can see the effects of the increasing haircuts in the chart below. The chart lists all types of bonds owned by all the banks on Cyprus. The red line is the important one. It shows "all off-island Eurozone Government Bonds."

The Fruits of Moral Hazard on a Global Scale

Inevitable Catastrophe

Insulate participants from risk with policies like the Bernanke Put and you guarantee destruction of both the market and institutional legitimacy

By Charles Smith (June 24, 2011)

Identify the common characteristic of these three statements:

1. The Federal Reserve will never let the stock market decline, i.e. the "Bernanke put"

2. The Chinese government will never let property prices decline

3. The European Central Bank will never let Greece default

The answer of course is moral hazard: a person who is insulated from risk will have an insatiable appetite for risky bets because any gains will be theirs to keep but any losses will be covered by the central bank or government. The global financial authorities’ success in propping up assets (stocks in the U.S., real estate in China, banks in Europe, etc.) over the past three years has strengthened this asymmetric disregard for systemic risk into a dangerously quasi-religious faith that central banks and governments have essentially unlimited power to keep asset prices aloft via printing money, manipulation of markets and financialization of their economies.

What happens if markets crumble despite massive, sustained central bank and government intervention? The institutions that created moral hazard will be revealed as false gods, and that faith will be destroyed.

This loss of faith in the transparent functioning of markets will trigger what I call the delegitimization of both the markets and the institutions which have essentially promised a permanent upward bias in assets.

We can see the global scale of this central bank-cnetral State induced moral hazard in the tight correlation of all markets: the stock exchanges rise and fall in near-perfect unison, oil and gold rise and fall in parallel with equities, and so on.

As I have noted before, beneath the surface there is really only one trade in the entire global marketplace: all assets on one side and the U.S. dollar on the other. Correlation is not causation, of course, but it is more than peculiar that every decline in global equities is matched by a concurrent rise in the dollar.

Transparent, independent markets do not move in lockstep. The campaign to prop up all asset classes with implicit guarantees of intervention has completely insulated institutions and punters who believe that the Bernanke Put and the Chinese government's equivalent prop under real estate is not just policy but a guarantee of god-like power.

Thus the gains from gargantuan speculative bets are yours to keep, and any losses will be made good by the central bank or government. This is the ideal recipe for misallocation of capital and speculative derangement on an unprecedented scale.

Moral hazard is the ultimate perverse incentive: it rewards all that is unproductive and risky and punishes long-term investment and prudent risk assessment.

A second feature of the global central bank's moral hazard is the necessity to punish any punters who dare to bet against the banks' manipulations. Thus Fed Chairman Bernanke could opine that oil would decline and presto-magico, a "surprise" release of oil by central authorities occurs the next day.

This second feature of central bank manipulation leaves a market devoid of short sellers and thus of any buyers as markets crumble.

Once trust is lost, it cannot be won back. Once participants' faith in the markets and in the god-like power of central bank intervention is crushed, the markets will lose participation on a grand scale. The authorities' favorite game, goosing asset prices to create an illusion of recovery and rising wealth, will be revealed as a global fraud.

Announcements of future interventions will be scornfully dismissed and thus they will have lost their power to prop up the markets.

All of this flows from the very nature of moral hazard: insulate participants from risk and give them unlimited leverage and "free money" to play with, and what you eventually end up with is catastrophe. There is no other possible end state.  

Germany’s account surplus jumps, no one is happy

Europe is a cauldron of uncertainty

By David Marsh

All Germany’s biggest European trade partners are in—or close to—recession, with output in the 17-member economic and monetary union (EMU) region contracting 0.4% last year and likely to fall by a further 0.1% this year, according to latest forecasts. Yet Germany’s current account surplus, measuring trade in goods and services as well as transfers to and from other countries, ballooned to a near-record 7% of GDP last year, the eighth consecutive year that the surplus has equaled or exceeded the 5% level widely regarded as unsustainably high for any other than leading energy-exporting countries.

A significant reason for the rise in the surplus was weakness in German imports which, according to the Bundesbank, was due to “raised uncertainty” among companies in Germany which might otherwise be importing foreign goods for domestic investment.

However, the higher surplus also reflects continued export success: a product of Germanic economic flexibility and the country’s sharp rise in trade with non-euro countries.

Germany still relies on Europe for about 69% of its exports. But, strikingly, European states outside the euro—ranging from Russia, Turkey and Poland to the U.K., Switzerland and Sweden—now account for nearly as much of Germany’s overall export total as countries within the euro.

Of Germany’s five top trading partners, three are outside the euro: the U.S., China and the U.K. According to the German Federal Statistics Office, on a relatively narrow measurement, Germany’s main five trading partners last year were, in descending order: France (with €169 billion), the Netherlands, China, the U.S. and the U.K.

However, taking into account the more extensive export and import figures (such as goods held in warehouses) from the Bundesbank’s balance of payments statistics, as well as trade in services, the U.K. comes out on top of the list of Germany’s 2012 trading partners, with an export and import total of €213 billion, followed by the U.S., France, the Netherlands and China.

EMU was supposed to produce economic stability. Yet, five years after the financial crisis, Europe is a cauldron of uncertainty. The sobering truth about the large current account surpluses heaped up by Germany and EMU’s other prime creditor country, the Netherlands, is that Europe’s monetary set-up has consistently produced much larger imbalances than those that caused the collapse of the Bretton Woods fixed exchange rate system 40 years ago.

The record-breaking run of surpluses has propelled Germany’s net foreign assets to €1,000 billion for the first time, according to latest Bundesbank figures for end-September 2012. Not that Germany’s burgeoning foreign assets are generating any rejoicing in Germany. Quite the opposite.

In an astonishing turnaround in the balance sheet of Europe’s largest economy, nearly 90% of the country’s net foreign assets are held by the Bundesbank, in the form of its currency reserves (including gold) and, above all, the now-celebrated Target-2 loans to the European Central Bank (ECB), representing indirect claims on the weakest members of EMU.

How to avoid a bloodbath in North Korea

A dictator with a sense of humor

America's oil and gas revolution

The U.S. will be an exporter of energy and drilling technologies well into the future

By Mark J. Perry

To grasp the importance of the revolutionary change in oil and gas drilling sweeping across the United States -- and its significance for our economy -- just consider how far behind the rest of the world is lagging.

America's innovative use of energy technology by "petropreneurs" is rejuvenating oil and gas production. Thanks to the combination of hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling in shale deposits, along with advances in seismic imaging that allow geologists to examine deposits more than a mile underground, energy resources long presumed to be beyond reach are now being tapped, or at least will be eventually. And it's happening as a result of something unique about America.

"In most of the world, if people are living on the land and there's hydrocarbons underneath it, they will fight it," Bob Dudley, group chief executive of BP, said recently in an interview with the Wall Street Journal. Private ownership of mineral rights in the U.S., along with an existing network of pipelines, enables oil and gas to find their way to market. And this, Dudley said, has given America its big head start.

The upshot is that a United States reliant on imported oil and natural gas is a thing of the past. To be sure, the U.S. will continue to be subject to world oil prices, and supply disruptions in the world will still create price spikes. But an abundance of domestic oil -- and growing use of natural gas in truck fleets -- will dampen price volatility, providing more stability for consumers.

How iron was the Iron Lady?

Both right-wing eulogisers and left-wing partiers are wrong

by Tim Black 

Margaret Thatcher, British prime minister between 1979 and 1990, died yesterday aged 87. But the myth of Margaret Thatcher, and the ersatz ideology named after her - Thatcherism - is still very much alive.

For the remnants of the right, especially dyed-blue Tories, the idea of Thatcher is predictably important. Her era, her electoral successes in 1979, 1983 and 1987, appears as something to be celebrated, a period of apparent success to be basked in. Once regarded as ‘the sick man of Europe’, awash with industrial conflict and a sense of inevitable post-colonial decline, Britain was said to be restored to health by Thatcher, runs the typical narrative. As current prime minister David Cameron put it: ’We have lost a great leader, a great prime minister and a great Briton.’

But for many of those who today preen themselves as left-wing, the idea of Thatcher is arguably even more important. And that’s because she can be blamed for everything that is wrong today. She may have left office nearly a quarter of a century ago, but so potent was the ideology she apparently promulgated - Thatcherism - that we as a nation continue to be in thrall to it. As one prominent left-wing columnist stated yesterday: ‘Thatcherism lives on. Nothing to celebrate.’ Ex-London mayor ‘Red’ Ken Livingstone agreed: ‘In actual fact, every real problem we face today is the legacy of the fact she was fundamentally wrong.’

Elsewhere, Johnathan Freedland at the liberalish-leftish Guardian joined the Thatcherism Lives chorus: ‘The country we live in remains Thatcher’s Britain. We still live in the land Margaret built.’ At the much-reported-upon, little-attended street parties in Brixton and Glasgow, staged in ironic honour of Thatcher’s passing, the belief that her ideas still walk among us was palpable. In the words of one 28-year-old student: ‘It is important to remember that Thatcherism isn’t dead and it is important that people get out on the street and not allow the government to whitewash what she did.’

Indeed, given the power, the brain-melding ideological force, with which Thatcher has been invested since her 1980s heyday, it is unsurprising perhaps that the Judy Garland song ‘Ding dong, the witch is dead’, from 1939 film musical The Wizard of Oz, is now being tipped for a No1 spot in the charts. For too many, Thatcher really has become a supernatural, witch-like figure, responsible for everything that is rotten in the world.

Is Divorcing An Abusive Spouse Ever Too Expensive?

The EU may soon face a Pyrrhic choice....

By John Mauldin

An old joke asks "why does a divorce cost you half your money?" with the answer being "because it’s worth it". After all, there is little worse than being stuck in a loveless, tense, or even downright hostile relationship. Which, of course, is what the eurozone has become, without even the excuse of keeping the show on the road for the kids’ benefit. In the eurozone’s loveless marriage, no-one dares to move out because the potential costs of that action are so unclear. However, with the news that French unemployment continues to scale record heights, that the Bank of Spain has just downgraded Spain’s growth forecasts from -0.5% to -1.5% and that Spanish unemployment will consequently rise for a sixth year in a row to a likely record high of 27%, that European car sales continue to plummet, etc... the question remains open as to how much abuse the various spouses are willing to take?

For now Cyprus clearly wins in the battered wife stakes: daily cash withdrawals from banks are limited to €300, time-deposits (even those below €100,000) are frozen until further notice, etc. And needless to say, like every abusive husband, the Troika offered up the usual contradictory messages of "Cyprus was looking for its beating" and "it will never happen again". And so the question now faced by Europe’s other, battered wives (i.e., investors in "fiscally-challenged" countries and other European Monetary Union bank depositors) is whether this abusive husband has seen the light? Or whether the next time the pressure boils, the Troika’s punches will again fly, thereby extinguishing any notion of European solidarity, any dream of banking union, and any hopes that eurozone nations will stop sleeping in separate rooms and instead jump in the same bed of a common fiscal union needed to live harmoniously under a common monetary roof?

The "good news" is that Europe’s battered wives may not have to wait that long to find out whether the Troika has turned a new leaf.

Why Are Workers Giving Up?

How long can one-half of America carry the other?

By PATRICK J. BUCHANAN

That America created only 88,000 jobs in March, less than half the number anticipated, was jolting news, indicating the recovery that the White House has boasted about may not be at hand.

But in that March jobs report, there was more disturbing news.

While unemployment fell to 7.6 percent, the reason it fell is alarming.

Half a million U.S. workers (495,000) disappeared from the labor force. They dropped out. They are no longer even looking for a job.

Worse, this appears to be an inexorable trend. The participation rate of eligible workers in the United States has fallen to 63.3 percent, a level unseen since Jimmy Carter gave his malaise speech in 1979.

These folks, who have quit working and quit looking, who are they? How do they support themselves? What does this surging dropout rate from the workforce portend for America’s future?

Defending democracy from the demos

The political classes’ fear of right-wing populism is really a fear of volatile voters

by Baris Tufekci 

A few weeks after February’s Eastleigh by-election in the south of England, the centre-left, Labourite think tank Policy Network published a report titled Democratic Stress: The Populist Signal and Extremist Threat. It addresses the problem of ‘right-wing populism’. It argues that populist parties like the UK Independence Party (UKIP) are threatening, or ‘stressing’, liberal democracy in Western Europe and elsewhere because they are undermining the ‘political mainstream’ - that is, the realm of ‘parties who sit comfortably within the pragmatic, pluralistic and institutionally bounded traditions of Western liberal democracy’. If democratic wellbeing is to be secured, mainstream parties must change their relationship with the public, the report says.

Apparently there are three political approaches today ‘which are consequential in terms of real world outcomes: the mainstream, populism and extremism’. The parties of the mainstream – whether ‘centre-right’ or ‘centre-left’ – have common cause in opposing approaches to politics that are contrary to their own ‘style and content’. While populism currently tends to take right-wing forms (UKIP, the Tea Party in America, the French Front National), populist challenges to the mainstream can also emerge from the left, the report argues. And any approach to politics that runs counter to that of the ‘liberal democratic’ mainstream is suspect and a cause for concern.

The report says liberal democracy’s virtue lies in its array of checks and balances on majority rule. The ‘populists’, by contrast, demand a democracy in which ‘the will of the morally pure majority is enacted - without much if any obstacle’. By wanting to impose majority rule, the populists don’t appreciate ‘social complexity’. Nor do they accept that complex bureaucratic institutions like the EU should have the right to impede what individual states can achieve. Liberal democracy is sensitive to these limitations and it has a range of institutional constraints on majority decision-making that safeguard minority interests. À la Robert Dahl, the report champions liberal democracy as a kind of ‘polyarchy’, a form of ‘minorities’ rule’. Its aim is to protect minorities from a majority that would otherwise engulf, overpower and oppress them.

The Myth of Margaret Thatcher

Conservatives must come to grips with the noble failure of the Iron Lady

By PETER HITCHENS

“The Iron Lady,” the cruel motion picture about Margaret Thatcher, makes much of her decline into bemused old age. It arouses sympathy for her among the undecided, and passionate sympathy among those who already revere her. No wonder. I cannot think of any other living person who could have been treated in this fashion. In a way it is a compliment to her that, even in the lonely, desolate weakness of her final years, her enemies—the unintelligent, intolerant left—continue to hate her.

With such people attacking her, it is hard not to rally to her side. But what about those of us who have an uncomfortable and growing suspicion that she was not as good as she is made out to have been? I am one of them. I still cannot resist the feeling that her reputation is not just inflated but damaging to the conservative cause.

I last saw her some years ago at a London publisher’s party, terribly diminished, surrounded by fawning persons who did not seem to see that she was unhappy, lonely, and puzzled. I felt almost ashamed to be there.

For I had been a minor witness of her great days, as we then thought they were. I was sometimes among the traveling press crouched in the back of her majestic but obsolete Royal Air Force plane as she zipped frugally across the world, to be admired and to tell other people what to do.

It was not intimate contact, but we saw more of her than most people ever could. Sometimes we would be summoned to her cabin for interminable briefings which never yielded anything worth writing—for to us she was just the same in private as she was in public. What journalists want from close contact is indiscretion and mischief. She, being a real leader, who sought power to do what she thought was good, was simply not interested in that. She was not really a politician, but a real human being who had entered politics to do what she wanted.

Fyodor Dostoevsky Was a Prophet

Dostoevsky’s 6 Nightmare Prophecies That Came True in the 20th Century

By R.J. Moeller 

Few people in the last 200 years understood human nature and mankind’s fallen state quite like Dostoevsky. His uncanny abilities to dissect the pathology of a killer or the spiritual joy of a contented Russian peasant have inspired generations of writers, thinkers, and even psychologists for a century and a half.

But more than simply being an insightful novelist on the human condition, Dostoevsky turned out to be a truly prophetic voice in his predictions of the dangerous and deadly places where certain ideologies and philosophies popular at the time would lead his beloved Russia in particular, and the modern Western world in general.

In the course of a number of his books – The Devils (aka The Possessed) and The Brothers Karamazov, for example – he foretold of the coming socioeconomic and geopolitical nightmares that awaited 20^th century societies that would adopt progressivism, nihilism, and socialism as their guiding principles. His words carry with them a deeper weight since Dostoevsky lived during his youth as a progressive ideologue eventually sentenced first to death and then, after a mock execution meant to “get his attention,” to four years of hard labor in Siberia.

He returned a deeply religious man and, after spending a few years in Europe investigating the teachings of leading Western intellectuals, a vehement anti-socialist.

In describing the underlying motivations of the young, radical, rabble-rousing character Peter Verkhovensky in The Devils, Dostoevsky said:

He’s a kind, well-meaning boy, and awfully sensitive…But let me tell you, the whole trouble stems from immaturity and sentimentality! It’s not the practical aspects of socialism that fascinate him, but its emotional appeal – its idealism –what we may call its mystical, religious aspect – its romanticism…and on top of that, he just parrots other people.

In the Army Now: Gangs, Nazis & the Mentally Ill

A new book chronicles how the War on Terror opened the ranks to risky recruits

By CLARK STOOKSBURY

Since the Vietnam War, America’s more successful interventions have been brief. That war engendered a legitimacy crisis in the United States military. Domestically, large numbers of young men resisted the draft or took advantage of deferments, but conscription still kept the armed forces supplied with men. In Vietnam, the military was riven by drug use, racial strife, and “fragging”—the assassination of unpopular officers by their troops. Operation Desert Storm in 1991 may be a model for a successful large-scale intervention post-Vietnam: the coalition allied with the United States dropped some bombs and sent an overwhelming ground force; Saddam capitulated while Lee Greenwood provided the soundtrack. If one ignores pesky issues such as the fate of Iraqi Kurds who were encouraged to rebel and the blowback from stationing U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia, the first Gulf War was a big success.

The United States fares worse when our goals are more ambitious and the enemy doesn’t quickly fold. When a volunteer army becomes bogged down in an unpopular war, protesters don’t fill the streets the way they did in 1969, and soldiers don’t “frag” their officers—people simply stop joining the military. The quest to fill that enlistment gap is where the investigative work of English journalist Matt Kennard comes in. In Irregular Army, Kennard documents a series of disturbing trends in the military: lowered standards, inadequately treated mental-health and substance-abuse problems, and the enlistment and retention of white supremacists, Nazis, and gang members.

No Cant in Immanuel

He who seeks in manners anything other than manners themselves is destined for crudity

by Theodore Dalrymple 

My late friend, the development economist Peter Bauer, had the most beautiful manners: so beautiful that I took them for my model. Alas, I could never equal them for, though not particularly ill-mannered, I have always to remember to behave well. Just as style in prose should be imperceptible, as the uniquely perfect vehicle for what is said and indissoluble therefrom, so manners should be unconscious, not added to conduct but intrinsic to it. They should not arise from reflection but from a habit so deeply ingrained that, however much they might once have been instilled or learned, they are now entirely natural and normal to the person who has them. And since their purpose is to ease social intercourse and make it agreeable, they should not be carried to the point of making anyone uncomfortable, turning them into mere etiquette in order to distinguish those who know how to behave from those who do not.

Peter Bauer used to say that Mrs Thatcher had two great achievements to her name (and only two): that she destroyed the power of the trade unions and that she raised him to the peerage. It was a matter of pride to him, tinged by ironical amusement, that he, the son of a Budapest bookmaker, should now sit in the British House of Lords; but the fact that he did so confirmed one of his most deeply held convictions, that a class society was not at all the same thing as a closed society. Social hierarchy is perfectly compatible with social mobility, as the maliciously misunderstood history of his adopted country amply demonstrated.

Down and out in Paris

France’s beleaguered president

François Hollande can still resuscitate his presidency—but he must tell the French the truth

By The Economist

THE French are not known for their optimism, but recently their morosité has been plumbing new depths. The popularity rating of the Socialist president, François Hollande, has tumbled faster and further than that of any other president since the Fifth Republic began in 1958. The decline in his fortunes is a rebuke for his failure to honour his breezy campaign promises last year to scrap austerity and cut unemployment. A television appearance on March 28th that was supposed to relaunch his presidency did not go well.

Now a scandal over his former budget minister, Jérôme Cahuzac, is likely to damage him further. Mr Cahuzac has admitted lying about an illicit Swiss bank account. Mr Hollande hung on to him for too long, and many claim that he should have known sooner about his dodgy finances (seearticle). The president had promised that, unlike his right-wing predecessor, Nicolas Sarkozy, he would run an exemplary government with squeaky-clean ministers.

Sultan Erdogan

Turkey's Rebranding Into the New, Old Ottoman Empire

In the eyes of secularists, the Europe-facing, Western-dressing, cocktail-toasting modern nation-state is being replaced by a religiously conservative one, headscarf by headscarf.

By CINAR KIPER

The cities might not seem similar today, but one thing Tripoli and Thessaloniki, Basra and Beirut, Sarajevo and Sana'a all once had in common is that just a little over a century ago they were all part of the Ottoman Empire. A second thing they all have in common is that until just a few years ago they harbored a certain disdain for Turkey ... due in large part to the aforementioned empire.

Yet former rivals to the south, east, north and even west now attend Turkish business summits, watch Turkish shows, and purchase Turkish groceries. Interestingly and perhaps contrary to common sense, this recent shift seems to come not as a product of "time healing old wounds" but rather at a period when Turkey has embraced its Ottoman heritage to an unheard-of level.

The foreign media loves to toss around the term "neo-Ottoman" when discussing the transformation of 21^st century Turkey, particularly in reference to its increasingly assertive foreign policy and regional presence, much to Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu's chagrin.

This is a golden age of global growth

Yes, you read that right

By Arvind Subramanian

An unequal world is becoming less so, writes Arvind Subramanian

When the world’s policy makers meet in Washington this month, the travails of advanced countries will be the focus. Five years into the global financial crises, the economic landscape remains largely cheerless. A depressed eurozone is struggling with high and rising unemployment. The US recovery is fitful. The blistering pace of emerging market growth has cooled. But all this risks obscuring the good news: that the golden age of global economic growth, which began in the mid-to-late 1990s, has mostly survived. These continue to be the best of economic times.

Lant Pritchett of Harvard famously described the phenomenon whereby the living standards of a few countries pulled away from the rest in the aftermath of the industrial revolution as “divergence, big time”. My 2011 book, Eclipse , documented the converse: never had the living standards of so many poorer nations begun to “converge” or catch up with those of advanced countries. What we are seeing today, despite the crises, is convergence with a vengeance. An unequal world is becoming less so.

Convergence occurs when a country’s rate of economic growth per head exceeds that of the typical advanced country, say the US. Between 1960 and 2000, the US grew at about 2.5 per cent. About 20 poor countries (excluding oil exporters and small countries) grew faster than the US by 1.5 per cent on average, among them remarkable growth stories such as Japan, Korea, Singapore, China and India.

Rest in Peace Bebo

Bebo Valdés  - born Ramón Emilio Valdés Amaro

(1918 – 2013)

Bebo Valdes, one of the leading figures of the golden age of Cuban music, passed away yesterday, at the ripe age of 94. His virtuoso piano playing and composition skills will be sorely missed by music lovers the world over.

In memory of the great man, whose career spanned a staggering eight decades, I leave you with one of his many brilliant music arrangements.

Still smoking? You must be mad

By linking cigarettes to mental illness, anti-smokers are reviving an old authoritarian tactic: pathologising deviants

by Patrick Hayes 

No matter how long and hard the anti-smoking lobby preaches, some dirty smokers just don’t listen. Despite countless attempts to bang the drum about the harm the filthy habit causes and anti-smokers’ successful attempts to attain ever-greater restrictions on where people can smoke, a sixth of the UK population still continues to light up. What must be going on in their heads? Are they mad?

This, it seems, is the conclusion that some in the anti-smoking lobby are rapidly arriving at. A number of reports, most recently one by the Royal College of Physicians (RCP) published last week, have found that people with mental-health difficulties are twice as likely to smoke than the rest of the population. This follows a report earlier in the year by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which found that one in three people with a mental illness smoke, compared to one in five for the population as a whole. Or, as the New York Times reported it, ‘People with mental illness are 70 per cent more likely to smoke cigarettes than people without mental illness’.

Following the publication of the RCP’s report, Professor John Britton, chair of the RCP’s Tobacco Advisory Group, commented that, ‘as the prevalence of smoking in the UK falls, smoking is increasingly becoming the domain of the most disadvantaged in our society, and particularly those with mental disorders’.

Since fierce clash, Egypt's crisis takes new turn

The Battle of the Mountain

By MAGGIE MICHAEL and SARAH EL DEEB

It has come to be known as the "Battle of the Mountain": a ferocious fight between members of Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood and their opponents near the group's Cairo headquarters. In a country that has already seen crisis after crisis, it could mark a dangerous turning point in the political turmoil.

The aftermath of the fighting is raising worries that the confrontation between Islamists, who dominate power in the country, and their opponents is moving out of anyone's control.

The riot on March 22 revealed a new readiness of some in the anti-Brotherhood opposition to turn to violence, insisting they have no choice but to fight back against a group they accuse of using violence against them for months. The fight featured an unusual vengefulness. Young protesters were seen at one point pelting a Brotherhood member with firebombs and setting him aflame. Others chased anyone with a conservative Muslim beard, while Islamists set up checkpoints searching for protesters. Each side dragged opponents into mosques and beat them.

Since the fight, Islamists enraged by what they saw as aggression against their headquarters have for the past week hiked up calls for wider action against opponents - and the media in particular - accusing them of trying to overthrow Islamist President Mohammed Morsi.

Those calls may explain moves by the country's top prosecutor the past week: the questioning of a popular television comedian, Bassem Youssef, whose Jon Stewart-style satires of Morsi drive Islamists into knots of anger, the summoning of several other media personalities and the issuing of arrest warrants against five opposition activists on accusations of fomenting violence.

When The Government Goes Bankrupt

Should Americans yet unborn pay for all of this?

By Judge Andrew Napolitano

What happens when the government goes bankrupt? This question is one that sounds like a hypothetical exercise in a law school classroom from just a few years ago, where it might have been met with some derision. But today, it is a realistic and terrifying inquiry that many who have financial relationships with governments in America will need to make, and it will be answered with the gnashing of teeth.

Earlier this week, a federal judge accepted the bankruptcy petition of Stockton, Calif., a city of about 300,000 residents northeast of San Francisco, over the objections of those who had loaned money to the city. The lenders – called bondholders – and their insurers saw this coming when the city stopped paying interest on their loans – called bonds. In this connection, a bond is a loan made to a municipality, which pays the lender tax-free interest and returns the principal when it is due. Institutional lenders usually obtain insurance, which guarantees the repayment but puts the insurance carrier on the hook.